About your Search

20130113
20130121
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5 (some duplicates have been removed)
taken a step back on this debt ceiling standoff. should it be raised. this is how "the new york times" described it over the weekend. i'll put it up on the screen and have you react to it. backing down from the hardline stance, house republicans said friday they would agree to lift the federal government's statuary borrowing limit for three months with a requirement that both chambers of the congress pass a budget in that time to clear the way for negotiations on long-term deficit reduction to add muscle to the efforts to bring democrats to the table, they would include a provision in the debt ceiling legislation saying that lawmakers will not be paid if they do not pass a budget blueprint. was it right to step back from challenging the president over raising the debt ceiling? >> well, i think the house proposal is a step in the right direction. no doubt the senate hasn't done it's job. it's been nearly four years since it's passed a budget. the senate should pass a budget. but it doesn't go nearly far enough. we have a crisis. i just got back last week from afghanistan. and i had mul
for the debt ceiling proposal. that was from the last time the house republicans threatened the country with defaulting on our debt back in 2011. dennis ross, you probably should have calibrated your place in line a little better. throw a democrat in there ahead of you when you realize that's what you're going to get. get there in time for the repeal prohibition amendment next time. that's more fun. if you have found yourself at home constitutionally -- forgive me, constitutionally incapable of getting excited over having another fight about the debt ceiling this year, if this isn't exciting because it just feels like groundhog day to you, oh my god, i've got reckless brinksmanship fatigue, it is true that it's hard to get excited over something we have done before. it is 2013 now. remember when it happened it was a total disaster. even if you just ignore the political consequences, if you just look at the economic impact, it was a self-imposed economic disaster caused by washington refusing to do something that it needs to do and that it has done dozens of times before. republicans jus
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5 (some duplicates have been removed)